Community Visual Field Screening: Prevalence of Follow-Up and Factors Associated With Follow-Up of Participants With Abnormal Frequency Doubling Perimetry Technology Results

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven L. Mansberger ◽  
Beth Edmunds ◽  
Chris A. Johnson ◽  
Kyle J. Kent ◽  
George A. Cioffi
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Frequency Doubling ◽  
Field Screening ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Frequency Doubling Perimetry

Low-cost, smartphone-based frequency doubling technology visual field testing using a head-mounted display

2019 ◽  
pp. bjophthalmol-2019-314031 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karam AlRahman Alawa ◽  
Ryan P Nolan ◽  
Elaine Han ◽  
Alejandro Arboleda ◽  
Heather Durkee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Linear Regression ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Frequency Doubling ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Field Screening ◽  
Head Mounted Display ◽  
Frequency Doubling Technology ◽  
Significant Difference

BackgroundCurrent visual field screening machines are bulky and expensive, limiting their accessibility, affordability and use. We report the design and evaluation of a novel, portable, cost-effective system for glaucoma screening using smartphone-based visual field screening using frequency doubling technology (FDT) and a head-mounted display.MethodsNineteen eyes of 10 subjects with new-onset or chronic primary open angle glaucoma were tested and compared with the Humphrey Zeiss FDT and the newly developed Mobile Virtual Perimetry (MVP) FDT with the C-20 testing pattern. Mann-Whitney, Bland-Altman and linear regression analyses were performed to assess statistical difference, agreement and correlation, respectively, between the two devices.ResultsThe average age of the participants was 58±15 years. No statistically significant difference was found between the MVP FDT and the Humphrey Zeiss FDT (p>0.05). Bland-Altman and linear regression analyses demonstrated good agreement and correlation between the two devices.ConclusionThe MVP FDT is a low-cost, portable visual field screening device that produces comparable results to the Humphrey Zeiss FDT and may be used as an easily accessible screening tool for glaucoma.

Clinical classification of glaucomatous visual field loss by frequency doubling perimetry

1998 ◽  
Vol 125 (6) ◽  
pp. 830-836 ◽  
Author(s):  
William E. Sponsel ◽  
Santiago Arango ◽  
Yolanda Trigo ◽  
Josepha Mensah
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Frequency Doubling ◽  
Visual Field Loss ◽  
Clinical Classification ◽  
Frequency Doubling Perimetry

Visual field indexes for version 3.0 of frequency doubling perimetry in patients with glaucoma

2003 ◽  
Vol 135 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Da Wei Zhang ◽  
Katsuyuki Minowa ◽  
Tadao Hanawa ◽  
Naoya Fujimoto ◽  
Kazuhide Tsukamoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Frequency Doubling ◽  
Frequency Doubling Perimetry

Role of frequency doubling perimetry in detecting neuro-ophthalmic visual field defects

2001 ◽  
Vol 131 (6) ◽  
pp. 734-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devdutt Thomas ◽  
Ravi Thomas ◽  
Jaya Prakash Muliyil ◽  
Ronnie George
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Frequency Doubling ◽  
Visual Field Defects ◽  
Frequency Doubling Perimetry ◽  
Field Defects

A Comparison between Humphrey and Frequency Doubling Perimetry for Chiasmal Visual Field Defects

2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 739-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Noval ◽  
I. Contreras ◽  
G. Rebolleda ◽  
F.J. Muñoz-negrete ◽  
B. Ruiz de zárate
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Frequency Doubling ◽  
Visual Field Defects ◽  
Frequency Doubling Perimetry ◽  
Field Defects
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document